AUGUSTA — A proposed vacant buildings ordinance goes too far and could have unintended consequences for homeowners, some city councilors and residents warn.
Resident and local real estate broker Kevin Judkins said the ordinance might have been meant to target large mortgage-issuing banks that don’t maintain properties in foreclosure, but it also would place a burden on homeowners who might have to leave their homes unoccupied for a variety of reasons.
The ordinance would require most owners of buildings left unoccupied for 60 days or more to register their buildings with the city and pay a fee every six months of $100 for individuals or $200 for commercial entities.
The ordinance was drafted after residents and councilors complained about vacant homes being left unmaintained and unsecured.
“I understand the intent and need, but I’ve read the ordinance and I’m concerned about some unintended consequences,” Judkins told city councilors Thursday. “It seems to be written towards big, bad banks that don’t take care of properties, but it seems like it will impact a lot of other people.”
Judkins cited, as an example, a local elderly woman who moved out of her Augusta home to care for her brother out of state, leaving her home unoccupied for much more than 60 days. As it is currently written, she would be subject to the proposed ordinance, requiring her to register the home and pay fees.
“She has very little money. This would be a burden on her,” he said. “She’d have to pay fees, every six months, for the privilege of not being able to occupy her home. You need to look at all aspects of this ordinance and think it through a little better.”
City councilors, too, expressed concerns about the ordinance.
Ward 1 Councilor Linda Conti said she was approached by landlords in her neighborhood who asked that exceptions be made for unoccupied buildings that are being actively marketed for rent and buildings undergoing renovations.
At-large Councilor Jeffrey Bilodeau said he doesn’t think landlords should be required to notify the city every time their building is unoccupied if it takes them longer than 60 days to find a new tenant. He said he wants the ordinance to apply only to the owners of buildings who aren’t maintaining their buildings or meeting safety codes.
“If I have a duplex, and it’s not rented out for a while, I don’t think it’s any of (the city’s) business as long as I’m paying my property taxes and my property is maintained,” Bilodeau said. “Why do I need to register with you? It’s my apartment. I thought we were going after abandoned properties. Now we’re starting to go after vacant properties, for-rent properties. That’s a slippery slope.”
Ward 3 Councilor Patrick Paradis suggested the ordinance be crafted to target properties that are both vacant and abandoned, not just vacant.
In response to those and other concerns, councilors plan to consider on Thursday making changes to the ordinance at their informational meeting. The proposed new ordinance could go to councilors for a vote in early September.
The ordinance would require the owners of buildings vacant for more than 60 days to register with the city and provide contact information for someone in Maine responsible for the property who could respond to building problems and notifications of code violations or other city actions related to the building.
“There are a lot of houses that are just held in limbo, and there doesn’t seem to be anyone you can get in touch with who is in charge of it. That’s the issue we’re trying to get at,” Conti said. “The bank (that foreclosed on the property) may be in New York City, its property management company in California, and when you call them up you get nothing but a menu of people and they never call you back. I’m not talking about our local state-chartered banks at all. They work with us very well.”
Judkins said he thought the part of the ordinance requiring contact information to be provided by building owners had value and was fair.
Keith Luke, the city’s deputy director of development, said members of the committee that drafted the proposed ordinance were concerned that allowing exceptions for properties being sold might provide a loophole allowing building owners to avoid complying with the ordinance.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
Success. Please wait for the page to reload. If the page does not reload within 5 seconds, please refresh the page.
Enter your email and password to access comments.
Hi, to comment on stories you must . This profile is in addition to your subscription and website login.
Already have a commenting profile? .
Invalid username/password.
Please check your email to confirm and complete your registration.
Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or login first for digital access. Here’s why.
Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.